Sorry, my subject was misleading--this is a Gen-ART telechat review,
not a LC review.
Thanks,
Ben.
On Aug 22, 2008, at 5:24 PM, Ben Campbell wrote:
I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART)
reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see
http://www.alvest
I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART)
reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see
http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html).
Please wait for direction from your document shepherd
or AD before posting a new version of the draft.
Document:
Hi,
The discussion so far and the proposed revisions address all of my
comments.
Thanks!
Ben.
On Aug 22, 2008, at 1:31 PM, Lars Eggert wrote:
Hi,
On 2008-8-22, at 11:16, ext Ben Campbell wrote:
Section 3.1.2, paragraph 1:
Should I take this to mean that implementing TFRC is insufficien
Hi,
On 2008-8-22, at 11:16, ext Ben Campbell wrote:
Section 3.1.2, paragraph 1:
Should I take this to mean that implementing TFRC is insufficient
for low-volume applications, and that they should follow the
guidelines in this section even if they implement TFRC? If so,
this conflicts with
On Aug 21, 2008, at 9:32 PM, Lars Eggert wrote:
Hi,
thanks for your comments!
On 2008-8-12, at 15:27, ext Ben Campbell wrote:
Section 3.1.1, paragraph 3:
I think this paragraph may be confusing to some implementors, in
that you suggest monitoring packet-loss to determine fair bandwidth
I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART)
reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see
http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html ).
Document: draft-ietf-nfsv4-rpcsec-gss-v2-05.txt
Reviewer: Scott Brim
Review Date: 22 Aug 2008
